THERE is no arguing with the sentiments behind moves by The Lake District National Park Authority to intervene in the house building market, in order to come to the rescue of local people trying to find affordable homes.

In one of those surveys that seem to state the obvious, but are actually quite helpful to make a case when trying to get authorities to change policy, the Joseph Rowntree Foundation confirmed the Lake District as one of the worst areas in the country for the gap between what local people earn and how expensive houses are.

The Foundation identified that young people needed to borrow at least five times their annual earnings to cover the cost of a starter home.

The social consequences of this sort of differentiation have been well chronicled: the brain-drain of young talent and a fast-disappearing workforce; a slewing in the average age of the population upwards; and distorted communities with no need for schools and the loss of facilities generally. It all adds up to an unsustainable future.

But tempting though it is to have an emotional response, the problem won't be solved by sympathy alone.

After a lively debate, the LDNPA decided to reject a proposal to charge developers a community fee, which would then be used to finance affordable homes provided by the authority through a housing association.

Such an imposition would just persuade developers that there was no point in building any homes in the Lakes. Building, like any business, is driven by profits.

Besides, the building firms themselves have co-operated enthusiastically with schemes where local authorities have given planning permission on the condition that new estates contain a quota of houses to be offered at lower prices to local people.

Indeed, as one developer explained, builders employ local people who are trying to get on the housing ladder. Without skilled labour, they would go out of business.

Instead the authority decided to seek guidance from the office of the Prime Minister how they could use their planning powers to secure money for affordable housing. This was quite a neat move.

Not only does it mean that the Deputy Prime Minister, who only last week was demanding builders provide houses at £60,000 a time, will be put on the spot on how his and the authority's aims can be achieved within the law, but it also brings the attention of the highest office in the land to the scale of the problem.

Whether that means that a solution will be found, only time will tell.